APPENDIX. DISSERTATION V. On the time of the admission of Caius Cæsar to the Councils of Augustus. Vide Dissertation v. vol. i. page 281. last line. AMONG those who were present at the council when Augustus decided on the will of Herod, both in the Antiquities of Josephus, and in the War, Caius Cæsar is particularly mentioned a. The privilege of being present at the public councils, after a certain age, was conceded by Augustus to the sons of senators generally. In the case of his two adopted sons, Caius and Lucius Cæsar, the Ancyran monument informs us, Honoris mei causa senatus populusque Romanus annum quintum et decimum agentes consules (eos) designavit, ut eum magistratum inirent post quinquennium, et ex eo die quo deducti sunt in forum ut interessent consiliis publicis decrevit senatus. Caius Cæsar was born U. C. 734d; and very probably in the latter half of that year: for Agrippa his father was not married to Julia until after his return from Asia the year before. He would, consequently, be in his fifteenth year about the usual time of holding the consular comitia, U. C. 748 and if he was designed consul at that time, when he had just completed his fourteenth, or had just entered on his fifteenth year, the testimony of the Ancyran marble would be consistent with that of the Marmor, quoted by cardinal a Ant. xvii. ix. 5. De Bello, ii. ii. 4. c Apud Tacitum, iv. 841. d Dio, liv. 8. b Dio, lvi. 17. Suetonius, Augustus, 38. Norisius, De Cenotaphiis Pisanise. He appears, accordingly, in the Fasti, as consul ordinarius, U. C. 754: that is, in the sixth year after the year of his designation, exclusive. From this time forward, the presence of Caius, as the elder of Augustus' two adopted sons, as heir apparent of the empire, and as consul elect-at all deliberations of any importance, might naturally be expected. Yet it is seen from Diof that even after this time, Augustus had so much reason to be dissatisfied with the young prince's conduct, as purposely to keep him back from many distinctions, to which he would otherwise have been admitted. It is implied in Dios, that Augustus admitted Caius Caesar εἰς τὴν ἐς τὸ συνέδριον συμφοίτησιν as early as U. C. 748: and it may appear to be implied in Josephus that the first occasion, on which he actually exercised this privilege, was the very occasion when Augustus held a council upon the will of Herod. But the language of Josephus in each instance is at least ambiguous, if not positively liable to misconstruction. According to both passages, and more especially to that in the Antiquities, the true account of his meaning appears to me to be, not that this was the first time when Caius had been admitted to such deliberations as these; but that he presided in the present instance along with Augustus; he took the chief seat next to him: which rather implies that he had been admitted to such consultations already. To suppose, indeed, that Caius was present at the public councils, upon this occasion, for the first time, and, consequently, that the question of the will of Herod was actually under discussion before Augustus, U. C. 748. or even, U. C. 749. would be utterly irreconcilable to any date of his death, • Dissertatio ii. cap. 3. Cf. Dio, lv. 9. 9. g Loco cit. Cf. Zonaras x. 35. 539. A. h Locis citatis. flv. however early, that could be proposed with the least degree of probability in its favour. The Ancyran monument, as we have seen, dates the admission both of Caius and Lucius Cæsar to the public consultations, Ex eo die quo deducti sunt in forum that is, from the time when they laid aside the toga puerilis or prætexta, and put on the toga pura, libera, or virilis. The age at which young men commonly underwent this ceremony was originally sixteen or seventeen i. Towards the end of the commonwealth, and thenceforward, however, the rule became different, and the toga virilis was commonly assumed in the fourteenth or fifteenth yeark. More particularly was this the rule observed in the case of persons of quality. Antyllus, Antony's and Fulvia's eldest son, was born U. C. 710, and assumed the toga virilis U. C. 7241. Nero, Germanicus' eldest son, was born U. C. 760, and assumed the toga virilis U. C. 773 m. Virilis toga Neroni maturata, says Tacitus": that is, he was allowed to assume it earlier than usual; viz. in his fourteenth year, ineunte, U. C. 804. ineunte *. The history of * According to Dio, lxi. 3. and Suetonius, Vita, 6. Nero was born U. C. 790. in the month of December. Tacitus also, Ann. xiii. 6. speaks of him as being Vix septemdecim annos egressus, U. C. 807. exeunte: and xii. 58. he is said to have been sixteen, U. C. 806. ineunte; which may be understood of fifteen complete or sixteen incomplete. Yet Tacitus is not always con sistent in speaking of the age of Nero. Ann. xii. 25. U. C. 803. ineunte he is said to have been only two years older than Britannicus, who was born, according to Dio,lx. 12. 10. and Suetonius, Claudius, 27. in the spring, or on Feb. 12, U. C. 795. Tacitus, indeed, from what he mentions Ann. xiii. 15. U. C. 808. may have thought that Britannicus was born a year earlier; k Ci i Vide Macrobius, i. 6: Aulus Gellius, x. 28: Plutarch, C. Gracchus, 5: Servius, ad Æneidem, vii. 162: Seneca, De Beneficiis, iii. xxxiii. 1 : Livy, xxi. 46: Valerius Max. v. iv. 2: Servius, ad Æneidem, x. 800: Valerius Max. iii. i. 1 : Echkel, de Doctrina Numm. Vett. v. 71: Servius, ad Æneidem, ix. 590: Livy, xxii. 57: xlv. 40: Plutarch, Cato Minor, 3. 73: Valerius Max. iii. i. 2. cero, Epp. ad Atticum, i. 2 : ix. 19: Cf. Donatus' Life of Virgil: Nicolaus Damascenus, Vita Aug. Cæs. pag. 90. cap. 4: Seneca, Ad Marciam, xxiv. 1: Statius, Silvarum v. ii. 12. 64. seqq. 1 Plutarch, Antonius, 10. 71. m Tacitus, Ann. iii. 29: Suetonius, Caius, 7. 8. n Annales, xii. 41. the later emperors, as of Marcus Antoninus the philosopher, of Commodus, Caracalla, &c. would still shew, if it were necessary, the observance of the rule in question. The time of the year when the ceremony of discarding the toga prætexta, and of the deductio in forum, was undergone, generally speaking, was the spring; viz. at the feast of Bacchus, or the Liberalia, xvi. Kal. Apriles, March 17. Restat, ut inveniam, quare toga libera detur Ovid, Fasti, iii. 771. Ergo ut tironem celebrare frequentia possit, Visa dies dandæ non aliena togæ1. Ibid. 787. And this may perhaps be considered the reason why the ceremony in question, according to the old usage, took place sometimes in the sixteenth, and sometimes in the seventeenth year; according to the new, sometimes in the fourteenth, sometimes in the fifteenth: viz. as the birthday of the individual happened to fall out nearer to or further from the Liberalia in question. We may take it for granted that the case of Caius and Lucius Cæsar would not be an exception to the general rule; in other words, that each of them would assume the manly gown in his fourteenth or his fifteenth year. And, indeed, Suetonius informs us o, that Augustus' only reason for accepting his twelfth and his thirteenth consulships respectively, was that he might reflect so much the more lustre on the ceremony of the tirocinium, or deductio in forum of his two sons that of Caius in the first instance, U.C. 749: viz. in the spring of U. C. 794. But even this will suppose Nero to have been born a year later than the truth at least-U. C. 791. exeunte, not U. C. 790. n Cf. Cicero, Epp. ad Atticum, vi. 1. o Augustus, 26. and that of Lucius in the second, U. C. 752*. If the one was born, after the Liberalia, U. C. 734. and the other after the Liberalia, U. C. 737. this would be, in each instance, while the fifteenth year of their age was still current. The anniversary of the Liberalia had not perhaps been three months passed, when Archelaus arrived at Rome; and Lucius Cæsar had probably by the same time entered on his fifteenth year. Hence, as the consultation in question upon the will of Herod, was not strictly a public one, it is not unlikely that Augustus might admit Lucius Cæsar to it; in which case, it would also not be unlikely that this admission of him was for the first time. If any one, therefore, is disposed to put such a construction on the words of Josephus, that whichever of the two, whether Lucius or Caius, was present on this occasion, he was present for the first time; it would be an obvious conjecture that by a lapse of memory, not at all uncommon in him, he has confounded Caius with Lucius. But I am persuaded that the other construction is his true meaning in each instance; and the ancient author of the Latin version understood both passages in the same sense: so that there is no just ground for questioning the accuracy of Josephus, either in the Antiquities or in the War, with respect to this statement at least. Lucius Cæsar, we perceive, is not mentioned by him, in reference to the present occasion, at all; and there is no reason to suppose that he would be. He did not become privileged to attend his father's councils, or those of the senate, until the en * Zonaras, x. 35. 539. A. agrees with Suetonius in the year of the deductio of Caius, but makes that of Lucius take place the year after. But this is probably a mistake. P Dio, liv. 18. |